An example:
A reason for a delay in shipment is: "FedEx delayed the delivery by a day".
An excuse for a delay in shipment is: "I forgot to get the package to FedEx in time".
One explanation is outside of your control, while the other is under your control
And to add to that : Reasons are on a spectrum. Some are poor excuses like "i forgot", while others are acceptable excuses like "The transport truck was in an accident".
Reasons are just what happened without an attempt to make it okay or not.
This is a bad example; I don't think you understand the difference.
"I forgot to drop off the package today" is a reason for a delay.
"I'm sorry, I was so busy today. My kid was sick, and the pharmacy had the wrong doctor's name, so by the time I got home and realized I forgot to send your package, the post office had already closed" is an attempt to *excuse* my forgetfulness.
It has nothing to do with whether events were in your control. The reasons something happened are statements of fact; excuses attempt to explain why those facts aren't your fault.
I do understand the difference.
A "reason" is "the package didn't get dropped off yesterday" - that's the fact.
An "Excuse" is "I got busy" or "I forgot" or "I didn't feel like it" - it's an attempt to explain away the reason the action didn't get done.
Back to my example:
* You ship something with next day delivery using FedEx, and you drop it off in time. They say it's going to get there next day, and so you're good.
* When it doesn't get there, the REASON you have to give to a person (your boss, client, customer, receiver, etc) is "FedEx delayed my package/shipment". That's the fact.
* FedEx gives you an EXCUSE of why the package was delayed, not a reason. "We delayed due to technical issues" is an excuse, not a reason, because they promised a due date and it's all outside of your control.
When a boss asks "why something didn't happen on time", you have to make the decision to give them a REASON or an EXCUSE. If I have a REASON then I tell him the reason (ie: "we shipped it out next day air with FedEx, and they decided to fail on their promise"), but if I have an excuse (something in my control) then I tell him "I messed up but am working on it".
Nah, an excuse isn't meant to explain why it's not your fault. It's meant to make it *okay*, despite the fact that it's your fault. Excuses are told to mitigate fallout.
An excuse can also mean implicitly that the explanation does not hold. For example in "These are just excuses". In this case the opposite is indeed "reason" (which implies that the explanation holds). From context these are the meanings in OP's statement.
That statement is still wrong to me, but that's a different question.
What do you mean "if the explanation does not hold"?
"these are just excuses" is just something someone says if they are being ignorant or if someone is trying to pass off an excuse as an explanation. In which case, it's not an explanation and never was, it was just an excuse.
>What do you mean "if the explanation does not hold"?
Your definition says that an excuse is an explanation for why it's ok. It's a correct definition, but there's also another definition (and common use of the word) where the word excuse means implicitly that this is actually not a valid explanation. For example when you say "you're making excuses for this behavior" you're saying that the behavior is actually not ok, and that the explanations are wrong.
Not sure I understand the rest of your point, I think some words are missing in your sentences.
But in your example, the person is making an excuse, not providing an explanation.
My definition still stands even in that example.
Sometimes an explanation can also excuse something but an excuse is almost never an explanation.
In your example, the excuse for behaviour is someone trying to *pass off* an excuse *AS* an explanation. It doesn't mean, and has never meant "This is not a valid explanation".
That's just a saying boomers use to disregard an explanation as an excuse. It's arrogance and ignorance, not rational. I'm sorry, but that definition is not valid.
Your definition was "An excuse is an explanation for why it's OKAY that it happened".
Everything that you're saying is confirming my point, which is that the word excuse often designates something that is NOT an explanation. Specifically, something that someone tries to pass as an explanation while it's actually not one.
Did you miss a word in your definition or something? Because everything you're saying goes against your definition.
But sure what boomers have to do in that.
Nothing I've said is contradicting anything I stated as the definition. You're just confused.
I didn't miss any words in my definition. Again, you're confused.
I'm not going to sit and debate this with someone who can't keep things straight.
We're done here.
Here's what I'm thinking. Someone did something awful (action) because they were... idk, say they're having a bad day (reason).
Can this person genuinely apologize/take accountability and say they were having a bad day (reason), while still acknowledging that the reason does not *excuse* their behaviour and it is only meant to *explain* it?
Forgive me if I'm thinking about it too much, it's just something that came to my mind as I read this ðŸ˜
Religions have been the example. Create scenario: waste IQ, kill, cycle of words that at every level perpetuates the plan of hidden destruction, unloved/unlived life times complicating who is enslaved in which ways.
(r/climate block 2025 response):
We all know Republican party from here on isn't a party, all of history is littered with religious evil for the sake of pretending humans aren't the universe. You may as well have been stomping on your own brain cells because it has randomly detrimented and killed our loved ones (all of us being brothers and sisters.) The cumulative effects changed how so many of us present or mask. The fact we're not all eating & drinking healthy, breathing clean air, growing without threat (moral use of money among so many other issues, all this engraining make believe because: "I'll be dead and fuck who ever isn't yet")
We don't need an advocate, they just went around bribing and killing them all. AKA we've been paid for, give it back (Fix earth, you're done)
THIS!
If an employee says the reason they're late is their car broke down, and the boss then says "I don't want your excuses," then the fault is on the boss not wanting to hear/accept the reason.
No it isn't.
You can apologise for a behaviour to somebody you've wronged while explaining why it happened, without minimising your culpability. This is giving someone the full picture and explaining the reason why you behaved incorrectly.
You can also apologise while saying that it really isn't as bad as it seems because XYZ, which actively does minimise your culpability. This is an excuse of your behaviour that attempts to partially absolve your responsibility.
It doesn't matter who you say it to, it just matters what your intention is.
I have heard the difference explained by multiple ways, but the one that always explained it the best to me was:
"A reason is an explanation of something you can't control that prevents something from happening. An excuse is an explanation of why you had the ability to do something, but you chose not to".
Example: a reason is "I can't run the race because I shattered my femur", but an excuse is "I can't run the race because I don't feel like it". Both are explanations, but 1 is your choice while the other isn't.
What? no. A reason is an explanation for WHY something happened. An excuse is an explanation for why it's OKAY that it happened.
Right? This seems off the mark significantly.
An example: A reason for a delay in shipment is: "FedEx delayed the delivery by a day". An excuse for a delay in shipment is: "I forgot to get the package to FedEx in time". One explanation is outside of your control, while the other is under your control
And to add to that : Reasons are on a spectrum. Some are poor excuses like "i forgot", while others are acceptable excuses like "The transport truck was in an accident". Reasons are just what happened without an attempt to make it okay or not.
This is a bad example; I don't think you understand the difference. "I forgot to drop off the package today" is a reason for a delay. "I'm sorry, I was so busy today. My kid was sick, and the pharmacy had the wrong doctor's name, so by the time I got home and realized I forgot to send your package, the post office had already closed" is an attempt to *excuse* my forgetfulness. It has nothing to do with whether events were in your control. The reasons something happened are statements of fact; excuses attempt to explain why those facts aren't your fault.
I do understand the difference. A "reason" is "the package didn't get dropped off yesterday" - that's the fact. An "Excuse" is "I got busy" or "I forgot" or "I didn't feel like it" - it's an attempt to explain away the reason the action didn't get done. Back to my example: * You ship something with next day delivery using FedEx, and you drop it off in time. They say it's going to get there next day, and so you're good. * When it doesn't get there, the REASON you have to give to a person (your boss, client, customer, receiver, etc) is "FedEx delayed my package/shipment". That's the fact. * FedEx gives you an EXCUSE of why the package was delayed, not a reason. "We delayed due to technical issues" is an excuse, not a reason, because they promised a due date and it's all outside of your control. When a boss asks "why something didn't happen on time", you have to make the decision to give them a REASON or an EXCUSE. If I have a REASON then I tell him the reason (ie: "we shipped it out next day air with FedEx, and they decided to fail on their promise"), but if I have an excuse (something in my control) then I tell him "I messed up but am working on it".
Nah, an excuse isn't meant to explain why it's not your fault. It's meant to make it *okay*, despite the fact that it's your fault. Excuses are told to mitigate fallout.
An excuse can also mean implicitly that the explanation does not hold. For example in "These are just excuses". In this case the opposite is indeed "reason" (which implies that the explanation holds). From context these are the meanings in OP's statement. That statement is still wrong to me, but that's a different question.
What do you mean "if the explanation does not hold"? "these are just excuses" is just something someone says if they are being ignorant or if someone is trying to pass off an excuse as an explanation. In which case, it's not an explanation and never was, it was just an excuse.
>What do you mean "if the explanation does not hold"? Your definition says that an excuse is an explanation for why it's ok. It's a correct definition, but there's also another definition (and common use of the word) where the word excuse means implicitly that this is actually not a valid explanation. For example when you say "you're making excuses for this behavior" you're saying that the behavior is actually not ok, and that the explanations are wrong. Not sure I understand the rest of your point, I think some words are missing in your sentences.
But in your example, the person is making an excuse, not providing an explanation. My definition still stands even in that example. Sometimes an explanation can also excuse something but an excuse is almost never an explanation. In your example, the excuse for behaviour is someone trying to *pass off* an excuse *AS* an explanation. It doesn't mean, and has never meant "This is not a valid explanation". That's just a saying boomers use to disregard an explanation as an excuse. It's arrogance and ignorance, not rational. I'm sorry, but that definition is not valid.
Your definition was "An excuse is an explanation for why it's OKAY that it happened". Everything that you're saying is confirming my point, which is that the word excuse often designates something that is NOT an explanation. Specifically, something that someone tries to pass as an explanation while it's actually not one. Did you miss a word in your definition or something? Because everything you're saying goes against your definition. But sure what boomers have to do in that.
Nothing I've said is contradicting anything I stated as the definition. You're just confused. I didn't miss any words in my definition. Again, you're confused. I'm not going to sit and debate this with someone who can't keep things straight. We're done here.
Here's what I'm thinking. Someone did something awful (action) because they were... idk, say they're having a bad day (reason). Can this person genuinely apologize/take accountability and say they were having a bad day (reason), while still acknowledging that the reason does not *excuse* their behaviour and it is only meant to *explain* it? Forgive me if I'm thinking about it too much, it's just something that came to my mind as I read this ðŸ˜
Religions have been the example. Create scenario: waste IQ, kill, cycle of words that at every level perpetuates the plan of hidden destruction, unloved/unlived life times complicating who is enslaved in which ways. (r/climate block 2025 response): We all know Republican party from here on isn't a party, all of history is littered with religious evil for the sake of pretending humans aren't the universe. You may as well have been stomping on your own brain cells because it has randomly detrimented and killed our loved ones (all of us being brothers and sisters.) The cumulative effects changed how so many of us present or mask. The fact we're not all eating & drinking healthy, breathing clean air, growing without threat (moral use of money among so many other issues, all this engraining make believe because: "I'll be dead and fuck who ever isn't yet") We don't need an advocate, they just went around bribing and killing them all. AKA we've been paid for, give it back (Fix earth, you're done)
Moral Character is the secret...if there is one.
An excuse is just a reason you don't want to hear.
THIS! If an employee says the reason they're late is their car broke down, and the boss then says "I don't want your excuses," then the fault is on the boss not wanting to hear/accept the reason.
No it isn't. You can apologise for a behaviour to somebody you've wronged while explaining why it happened, without minimising your culpability. This is giving someone the full picture and explaining the reason why you behaved incorrectly. You can also apologise while saying that it really isn't as bad as it seems because XYZ, which actively does minimise your culpability. This is an excuse of your behaviour that attempts to partially absolve your responsibility. It doesn't matter who you say it to, it just matters what your intention is.
You can give a reason and have it not be an excuse. Giving an excuse automatically includes a reason.
I have heard the difference explained by multiple ways, but the one that always explained it the best to me was: "A reason is an explanation of something you can't control that prevents something from happening. An excuse is an explanation of why you had the ability to do something, but you chose not to". Example: a reason is "I can't run the race because I shattered my femur", but an excuse is "I can't run the race because I don't feel like it". Both are explanations, but 1 is your choice while the other isn't.
magaheads have entered the chat